Intel Receives SuperSpeed USB 3.0 Certification

It's hard not to wonder why it took them so long, considering they pushed pretty aggressively for the USB 3.0 standard.

I thought they didn't like USB so much since they're trying to push their own thunderbolt standard...

Actually, I think Intel was more concerned with making the thunderbolt USB spec popular. I would say they were opposed to USB 3.0 thinking their technology was superior. That would account for feet dragging on Intel's part. Unless this is Thunderbolt were talking about and Intel renamed it...

At last....

Intel last to the table
TB is coming along slower than predicted. Which is hardly a surprise.

Welcome to 2009 Intel. It's about time, it took you 3 years to finally get on board.

isn't going from thunderbolt to USB 3.0 a downgrade?

USB 3.0 is not TB - 2 different technologies. Apple was behind the TB idea, it's not by coincidence Apple was the 1st to productize TB on their laptops.

Well that depends... Both have high data throughput but serve 2 different functions and have different objectives.

No, Intel developed Thunderbolt - which was first used in Apple's computers. Its intel technology, just as much as the CPU and chipsets in the Mac notebooks and desktops.

Its not the same as USB, quite different - both standards have their pros and cons. TB uses a daisy chain system, hence - you get only 1 TB port, vs 3~7 USB ports.

Welcome to the party Intel, now finally we will see the shift to usb 3 products at reasonable prices.

"I thought they didn't like USB so much since they're trying to push their own thunderbolt standard..."

They are ..but ironically USB is part their baby too!..

But can it go to plaid ?

I am shaking my head at the information in these comments >_>
Intel made Lightpeak, which used photonics to transfer data. Intel said they had to transition to copper (renames it Thunderbolt) because the costs were still prohibitive.
USB also daisy-chains.
It's hard to say i it's a downgrade because they are two separate connections serving different areas.
My opinion is that Intel did take way too long for USB 3, not sure why they did, but the first USB3 products out were at the end of 2009... and they had the specs back in 2008. 3 Years and we are finally seeing something from Intel.

i love how usb 3 hits the fysical speed limit of (older) harddrives

About Time

USB is not that big of a deal. I've been using a USB external drive and it is still slow as a dog. USB 3 is NOT eSATA. The bus resets too so it isn't something you can use as an enterprise port. It is basically useful for thumb drives, microcards, and the external drives you use for temporary storage. Lightpeak has a million more applications. Intel championed both interfaces as well as just about every other interface on your computer (PCI, SATA, etc.). I think Lightpeak is just another way to get some serious money from licensing fees before opening it up. Did Intel slowplay USB3 adoption for Lightpeak? Maybe... since Lightpeak can be used for the same uses, but lightpeak's bandwidth forces you to use PCI lanes. Until they change the core logic and come up with ways to improve overall system bus speed while still cutting power, you're not going to see a lot of lightpeak and maybe Intel finally realized that and bit the bullet on supporting USB3. Lightpeak may very well take over for USB3 in a few years when the motherboard logic fully supports it.

@IvyBridgeMan

So... where's Thunderbolt/Light Peak? Aside from Apple (which isn't exactly high-performance technology) and the Sony Vaio Z, I haven't seen it anywhere. Because it isn't anywhere.

I can't argue that USB 3.0 is still not fast enough (though that's more the fault of drivers and hardware on the other end and would be just as slow with Thunderbolt in the case of external drives).

Though USB 3.0 also forces you to use PCI-E lanes, just like Lightpeak does, though it only eats up one per port while Light Peak eats up 4. Intel's mainstream chipsets have a real problem with this (I remember Gigabyte's old 1155 boards couldn't provide enough bandwidth for USB 3.0 and SATA 6GB/s at the same time) though their high-end stuff doesn't.

Lightpeak's also really expensive. Cables for them cost quite a bit (I'll guess that their cost to make's about 15 bucks since Apple sells them for 50) not to mention the circuitry inside the device that has to be redesigned for that protocol (since it is, in essence, a PCI-Express device in itself and would have to include a SATA controller itself if it was any sort of drive (your micro SD card reader just got a lot bigger).

Plus, there's a lot more selection of USB 3.0 devices than Thunderbolt devices. A hardware is useless if no other devices support it.

Thunderbolt speed exceeds USB 3.0 easily thus making it far superior technology for transferring video etc.

Well it's about time. I want to see way more USB3 ports available in these chipsets coming out. Also, isn't TB going to be available with the Ivy Bridge chipsets as well?